> After responding to a lot of your comments it seems like you don't have a great grasp of US history.
As you said, we likely see history through a different lens because of what we read / experience. Im familiar with Goldwater, the strategy shift was “required” after the democrats shift. Aka there’s two parties they’re always vying for votes. That’s the nature of things, my point was it wasn’t either party in particular. They shift over time based on the voting base they’re trying to capture to maintain power.
I can say that without any emotional attachment or support or endorsements. I’ve frankly endorsed nothing in these discussions, mostly pointed a contrary viewpoint out that hasn’t been mentioned.
Generally, the comments such as
> States Rights has always been an anti-democratic rallying cry, and the main mechanism that the Republican party uses to stay in control is by limiting who can vote.
Was in fact a false statement throughout history. It’s also an extremely bias and dangerous narrative being spun. Today, states like California claim to be a “sanctuary state”, which lets them capture extra electoral votes. Or Colorado ignoring drug laws. While the republicans do discuss states rights. The democrats are at least as willing, if not more willing, to wield power. Look at representative districts in Illinois lol. Yet all we here are “republicans are going to steal the election, blah blah blah” garbage. Both do the same thing.
Regardless, the condescension is think in this conversation is breathtaking
> You are either being intellectually dishonest because you are too cowardly to take a hard stance on your regressive views, or you're just unaware of history.
I don’t need to actually take stances to have discussions. I enjoy mulling over ideas and considering others viewpoints. Unfortunately, this has devolved to name calling.
Regarding:
> It appears that you've exhausted your arguments at this point. You have no refutation so now you're claiming I'm biased when you are trying to make a "both sides bad" and "you're biased" argument to claim victory. You also failed to respond to my
I try to respond thoughtfully. At the same time, personal attacks are beneath you. There’s a lot of comments, I don’t respond to all because I frankly can’t. The bias is being pointed out not to “claim victory” but attempting to point out a hole in knowledge. It’s difficult to have an honest discussion when one party is calling the other a “reactionary” or “regressive”. There are factually wrong statements:
> States Rights has always been an anti-democratic rallying cry
Such as the above ^ states are closer to a democracy in the US. The federal government is a republic, state governments are closer to and can be a direct democracy (e.g. Californians propositions).